[Mono-list] [Ocl-general] Questions about OCL

[Robert Deviasse]

>The thing that I think Miguel didn't mention is the concept of
>"derivative work."  I doubt there is a legally precise definition of a 
>derivative work, but I will guarantee you that if you
>algorithmically transform one thing (Microsoft .NET DLLs or XML
>files) into something else (C# skeleton files), the something else
>will be considered a derivative work.  In that case, use and
>distribution of the derivative work must be compatible with the
>copyright and license you (where "you" is the creator of the
>derivative work) obtained from the original work's owner (Microsoft).

There actually is a legal definition of derived works that's been used by 
the music and literature industry for years. Take a look at:
    http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/faq.html#q49
or more specifically:
    http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ14.pdf

From the circular, translations are covered as derived works. Of course, if 
the ECMA license is compatible with the GPL, there isn't a problem.

This brings up another point, though. The ECMA states that it won't accept a 
standard unless it's freely licensed under reasonable terms. What do they 
consider reasonable? Most proprietary software developers would consider a 
license fee of 1 penny per copy in use extremely reasonable, but that would 
make open-source programming impractical. Is there anyone on the ECMA C# 
standardization committee that will make sure that the licensing terms are 
reasonable to open-source programmers too?

It seems like a number of companies on the ECMA board have vested interests 
in an open source implementation, but it may be a good idea to ask/remind 
them:
     http://www.ecma.ch/ecma1/MEMENTO/MEMBERS.HTM
     http://www.ecma.ch/ecma1/MEMENTO/tc39.htm
Does anyone have contacts in these companies?



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp